Robert Reese, Sr. v. Tom Carey
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner Robert D. Reese, Sr. appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that the medical care he received for a broken finger amounted to deliberate indifference. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo both the district court’s summary judgment ruling, Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1131 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc), and the district court’s dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, Sapp v. Kimbrell, 623 F.3d 813, 821 (9th Cir.2010), and we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on the claims against defendants Kofoed and Traquina because Reese failed to present evidence showing that either defendant acted with deliberate indifference. See Simmons v. Navajo County, 609 F.3d 1011, 1019 (9th Cir.2010) (failure to make correct medical decisions is not deliberate indifference); Clem v. Lomeli, 566 F.3d 1177, 1181 (9th Cir.2009) (defendants are deliberately indifferent only when they act or fail to act with knowledge of a substantial risk of serious harm).